Climate protesters block roads
Discussion
Europa1 said:
Here in Cambridge they are going to try and s
t down someone's business for a day: https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-ne...
I think motorists should go help out the BP garage. What do you think? t down someone's business for a day: https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-ne...
Do these clowns really think that getting in the way of the daily lives of ordinary people is going to endear anyone to their cause?
Apparently someone "drove a car into" one of them (translation: stupid bd intentionally stood in the way of a moving vehicle!). Good. I hope it hurt, and that it continues to hurt. Unfortunately the poor, frustrated sod driving the car - someone who only set out to fill their tank with fuel - will almost certainly be prosecuted.
Not sure why disruptive protest of this nature is tolerated. Stand on the metaphorical sidelines and wave your placards, fine, but purposely preventing the public from going about their normal, legitimate business should, IMO, be considered a criminal act.
Apparently someone "drove a car into" one of them (translation: stupid b
d intentionally stood in the way of a moving vehicle!). Good. I hope it hurt, and that it continues to hurt. Unfortunately the poor, frustrated sod driving the car - someone who only set out to fill their tank with fuel - will almost certainly be prosecuted.Not sure why disruptive protest of this nature is tolerated. Stand on the metaphorical sidelines and wave your placards, fine, but purposely preventing the public from going about their normal, legitimate business should, IMO, be considered a criminal act.
The normal, legitimate business of everyone is destroying the future lives of a huge amount if people.
That‘s how they see it. They have science to back them up. The courts seem to see it that way too.
Science says we need to drastically change our normal way of life. We need to produce no CO2 after 2050. That means humans need to build a nuclear power plant per day every day until 2050. Other options are also possible, but they are no less challenging.
That‘s how they see it. They have science to back them up. The courts seem to see it that way too.
Science says we need to drastically change our normal way of life. We need to produce no CO2 after 2050. That means humans need to build a nuclear power plant per day every day until 2050. Other options are also possible, but they are no less challenging.
turbobloke said:
Irony aside I know you know...the science says no such thing.
What do you mean by “science“?In the classic sense of the word you are correct.
In the modern sense of the word, where unvalidated models programmed with circular reasoning are considered evidence, and the most terrifying version of that evidence is the mainstream view, then you are incorrect.
It‘s all daft anyway. The people calling for massive change are exactly the same people who will chain themselves to trees to stop the nuclear plants being built. They will also block renewable sources of energy when they see just what scale is required to get CO2 output to zero.
In some ways it is good to get past the debate about whether CO2 is s gigantic problem. If you accept that most people think it is and then ask them to show you a reasonable plan to deal with that problem, they can’t.
Kawasicki said:
turbobloke said:
Irony aside I know you know...the science says no such thing.
What do you mean by “science“?In the classic sense of the word you are correct.
In the modern sense of the word, where unvalidated models programmed with circular reasoning are considered evidence, and the most terrifying version of that evidence is the mainstream view, then you are incorrect.
Kawasicki said:
It‘s all daft anyway. The people calling for massive change are exactly the same people who will chain themselves to trees to stop the nuclear plants being built. They will also block renewable sources of energy when they see just what scale is required to get CO2 output to zero.
And that's their good point.Kawasicki said:
In some ways it is good to get past the debate about whether CO2 is s gigantic problem. If you accept that most people think it is and then ask them to show you a reasonable plan to deal with that problem, they can’t.
Yes indeed. a new nuclear power plant every day from 01 Oct 2019 to 31 Dec 2049 would just about be OK but then as of today we're around 100 nukes down already.Alternatively (no pun intended) the deployment of 1500 wind turbines (2.5 MW) over 300 square miles, starting from 01 Oct 2019 and continuing to 31 Dec 2049 would do the trick, however there's currently a large and increasing deficit.
The start-date is what it is because that's when Prof Pielke Jr performed the calculation, which is easy enough as global power stats are available.
The carbon dioxide output of that amount of daily commissioning plus operating and maintaining that many turbines, all the way to 2050, would turn a greenie green.
To say 'they haven't thought this through' wrongly ascribes the presence of reasoned thought.
motco said:
So 11,000 nuclear power stations equals 1,500 wind turbines does it? Or is that 1,500 wind turbines per day, or sixteen and a half million of them? If the second then that's 55,000 per square mile over 300 square miles. Who's does these calculations? Diane Abbott?
Parrot incoming...?
11000 nukes is very different ^ i.e. 1500 turbines would be nowhere in sightParrot incoming...?
Here's a link, now everyone can work it out with a pencil.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerpielke/2019/09/3...
As with calculations of this type, the precise numbers depend on whether you're choosing one particular example of each (nuclear power station, turbine) i.e. which ones, and how they operate in terms of actual output / efficiency.
Given turbine output is measured as a few MW and a nuclear power station is measured as a few GW (1GW = 1000 MW) that's 1000 turbines for 1 nuke as an order of magnitude. Given a particular example of each, the numbers will come out around that value. Mainly for this reason, Pielke uses the ~ (meaning approx) symbol with the numbers.
The R.E. Ginna nuclear power station generates a total of 4,689,440 MWh per year.
At a typical capacity factor a 1.5 MW turbine generates 3,285,000 kWh per year.
1MWh = 1000 kWh
With the above example the nuclear power station is equivalent to 1428 turbines. There are other examples available giving a larger or smaller number around 1000.
Pielke had it as ~1500 (for a different comparison).
At a typical capacity factor a 1.5 MW turbine generates 3,285,000 kWh per year.
1MWh = 1000 kWh
With the above example the nuclear power station is equivalent to 1428 turbines. There are other examples available giving a larger or smaller number around 1000.
Pielke had it as ~1500 (for a different comparison).
Baby Shark doo doo doo doo said:
If one/some of these extremists glue themselves to your car, what’s the law regarding escape from the situation? Are you able to drive away at low speed or would you be required to stop?
I‘d imagine you would have to stop to avoid hurting anyone. If you were in immediate danger and it was your only course of action... then that’s a different situation.Personally, I‘m a pacifist... I feel sorry for most of them.
turbobloke said:
motco said:
So 11,000 nuclear power stations equals 1,500 wind turbines does it? Or is that 1,500 wind turbines per day, or sixteen and a half million of them? If the second then that's 55,000 per square mile over 300 square miles. Who's does these calculations? Diane Abbott?
Parrot incoming...?
11000 nukes is very different ^ i.e. 1500 turbines would be nowhere in sightParrot incoming...?
Here's a link, now everyone can work it out with a pencil.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerpielke/2019/09/3...
As with calculations of this type, the precise numbers depend on whether you're choosing one particular example of each (nuclear power station, turbine) i.e. which ones, and how they operate in terms of actual output / efficiency.
Given turbine output is measured as a few MW and a nuclear power station is measured as a few GW (1GW = 1000 MW) that's 1000 turbines for 1 nuke as an order of magnitude. Given a particular example of each, the numbers will come out around that value. Mainly for this reason, Pielke uses the ~ (meaning approx) symbol with the numbers.
Baby Shark doo doo doo doo said:
If one/some of these extremists glue themselves to your car, what’s the law regarding escape from the situation? Are you able to drive away at low speed or would you be required to stop?
I would require.1. A piece of A3 size white card.
2. A piece of string at least two metres in length
3. A black permanent marker.
4 A strong adhesive tape.
5. A suitable device for taking photos
6. A Wi-fi connection.
Method. When one finds a stinky rebel has glued itself to one's vehicle, take the A3 card and attach both ends of the string in a loop fashion with lengths of the adhesive tape.
With the permanent marker, write a slogan such as "I'm a w
ker" or "I have carnal knowledge of goats", for example. Or any other slogan of your choosing on the opposite side of the card. Remember to be insulting, but amusing with your slogan.With the aid of the looped string, place the card over the neck of the stinky rebel, ensuring that your written slogan is clearly visible. You should find that the offending rebel cannot resist as they have rendered themselves immobile due to being glued to your vehicle.
Once you have the card in place, you may proceed to take photos of the unfortunate protestor and after that, use a wi-fi connection to upload the photos onto the Internet. However, you may decide to make either memes or gif's first.
Edited by Langweilig on Sunday 19th January 13:47
Edited by Langweilig on Monday 20th January 15:57
motco said:
Ok, so it's nuts!
Yes, it‘s nuts... but we should ignore that.Highlighting with simple maths the scale of the insanity is unhelpful. It‘s what some have called “fact-mongering“. Fact mongering is the polar opposite of fear mongering, it is thought to be a morally objectionable method of argument, it paralyses against action.
Langweilig said:
I would require.
1. A piece of A3 size white card.
2. A piece of string at least two metres in length
3. A black permanent marker.
4 A strong adhesive tape.
5. A suitable device for taking photos
6. A Wi-fi connection.
Method. When one finds a stinky rebel has glued itself to one's vehicle, take the A3 card and attach both ends of the string in a loop fashion with lengths of the adhesive tape.
With the permanent marker, write a slogan such as "I'm a wker" or "I have carnal knowledge of goats", for example. Or any other slogan of your choosing on the opposite side of the card. Remember to be insulting, but amusing with your slogan.
With the aid of the looped string, place the card over the neck of the stinky rebel, ensuring that your written slogan in clearly visible. You should find that the offending rebel cannot resist as they have rendered themselves immobile due to being glued to your vehicle.
Once you have the card in place, you may proceed to take photos of the unfortunate protestor and after that, use a wi-fi connection to upload the photos onto the Internet. However, you may decide to make either memes or gif's first.
1. A piece of A3 size white card.
2. A piece of string at least two metres in length
3. A black permanent marker.
4 A strong adhesive tape.
5. A suitable device for taking photos
6. A Wi-fi connection.
Method. When one finds a stinky rebel has glued itself to one's vehicle, take the A3 card and attach both ends of the string in a loop fashion with lengths of the adhesive tape.
With the permanent marker, write a slogan such as "I'm a w
ker" or "I have carnal knowledge of goats", for example. Or any other slogan of your choosing on the opposite side of the card. Remember to be insulting, but amusing with your slogan.With the aid of the looped string, place the card over the neck of the stinky rebel, ensuring that your written slogan in clearly visible. You should find that the offending rebel cannot resist as they have rendered themselves immobile due to being glued to your vehicle.
Once you have the card in place, you may proceed to take photos of the unfortunate protestor and after that, use a wi-fi connection to upload the photos onto the Internet. However, you may decide to make either memes or gif's first.
Edited by Langweilig on Sunday 19th January 13:47
motco said:
Ok, so it's nuts!
A carbon neutral world by 2050 is nuts, by 2030 or the 12-year deadline before we fry in our own juices (!) i.e. 2032 it's not even a funny joke.
A small country like the UK may manage to get close around 2050 by means of renewables max, and planting zillions of trees. The books will need cooking by a skilled chef to get to zero, and woeful energy security will be part of the unfunny joke.
We're responsible for 1% of the world's tax gas (which is only 5% of total annually cycled tree food gas) so it will make f
all difference anyway.Edited by turbobloke on Sunday 19th January 17:11
Sooner or later someone will get hurt.
""Normally they tend to stop just before they get to us but this one actually drove straight into us. He hit my leg and drove my knee backwards."
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-ne...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff